"I have always been concerned about what really happened on September 11, 2001, but I have also always thought that the attacks were the result of a combination of determined action on the part of terrorists and official incompetence. I did not really believe that they might have actually been orchestrated by our own government. Indeed, such a thought, in itself, seemed almost treasonous to me. I am a political moderate, but I am also a strong patriot. I don't believe in condoning anti-government activity in time of war unless it is warranted by fact. "

continued ...at link

Last edited by Waverider on 02-02-2006 01:58 PM, edited 1 time in total.

""(PRWEB) - Duluth, MN (PRWEB) January 30, 2006 -- A group of distinguished experts and scholars, including Robert M. Bowman, James H. Fetzer, Wayne Madsen, John McMurtry, Morgan Reynolds, and Andreas von Buelow, have concluded that senior government officials have covered up crucial facts about what really happened on 9/11.

They have joined with others in common cause as members of "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" (S9/11T), because they are convinced, based on their own research, that the administration has been deceiving the nation about critical events in New York and Washington, D.C.

These experts suggest these events may have been orchestrated by elements within the administration to manipulate Americans into supporting policies at home and abroad they would never have condoned absent "another Pearl Harbor."

They believe that this White House is incapable of investigating itself and hope the possibility that Congress might hold an unaccountable administration accountable is not merely naive or wishful thinking.

They are encouraging news services around the world to secure scientific advice by taking advantage of university resources to verify or to falsify their discoveries. Extraordinary situations, they believe, require extraordinary measures.

If this were done, they contend, one of the great hoaxes of history would stand naked before the eyes of the world and its perpetrators would be clearly exposed, which may be the only hope for saving this nation from ever greater abuse.

They hope this might include The New York Times, which, in their opinion, has repeatedly failed to exercise the leadership expecedt from our nation's newspaper of record by a series of inexplicable lapses. It has failed to vigorously investigate tainted elections, lies leading to the war in Iraq, or illegal NSA spying on the American people, major unconstitutional events. In their view, The Times might compensate for its loss of stature by helping to reveal the truth about one of the great turning-point events of modern history.

Stunning as it may be to acknowledge, they observe, the government has brought but one indictment against anyone and, to the best of their knowledge, has not even reprimanded anyone for incompetence or dereliction of duty. The official conspiracy theory--that nineteen Arab hijackers under control of one man in the wilds of Afghanistan brought this about--is unsupportable by the evidential data, which they have studied. They even believe there are good reasons for suspecting that video tapes officially attributed to Osama bin Laden are not genuine.

They have found the government's own investigiation to be severely flawed. The 9/11 Commission, designated to investigate the attack, was directed by Philip Zelikow, part of the Bush transition team in the NSA sector and the co-author of a book with Condoleezza Rice. A Bush supporter and director of national security affairs, he could hardly be expected to conduct an objective and impartial investigation.

They have discovered that The 9/11 Commission Report is replete with omissions, distortions, and factual errors, which David Ray Griffin has documented in his book, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions. The official report, for example, entirely ignores the collapse of WTC7, a 47-story building, which was hit by no airplanes, was only damaged by a few small fires, and fell seven hours after the attack.

Here are some of the kinds of considerations that these experts and scholar find profoundly troubling:

* In the history of structural engineering, steel-frame high-rise buildings have never been brought down due to fires either before or since 9/11, so how can fires have brought down three in one day? How is this possible?

* The BBC has reported that at least five of the nineteen alleged "hijackers" have turned up alive and well living in Saudi Arabia, yet according to the FBI, they were among those killed in the attacks. How is this possible?

* Frank DeMartini, a project manager for the WTC, said the buildings were designed with load redistribution capabilities to withstand the impact of airliners, whose effects would be like "puncturing mosquito netting with a pencil." Yet they completely collapsed. How is this possible?

* Since the melting point of steel is about 2,700*F, the temperature of jet fuel fires does not exceed 1,800*F under optimal conditions, and UL certified the steel used to 2,000*F for six hours, the buildings cannot have collapsed due to heat from the fires. How is this possible?

* Flight 77, which allegedly hit the building, left the radar screen in the vicinity of the Ohio/Kentucky border, only to "reappear" in very close proximity to the Pentagon shortly before impact. How is this possible?

* Foreign "terrorists" who were clever enough to coordinate hijacking four commercial airliners seemingly did not know that the least damage to the Pentagon would be done by hitting its west wing. How is this possible?

* Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, in an underground bunker at the White House, watched Vice President Cheney castigate a young officer for asking, as the plane drew closer and closer to the Pentagon, "Do the orders still stand?" The order cannot have been to shoot it down, but must have been the opposite. How is this possible?

* A former Inspector General for the Air Force has observed that Flight 93, which allegedly crashed in Pennsylvania, should have left debris scattered over an area less than the size of a city block; but it is scattered over an area of about eight square miles. How is this possible?

* A tape recording of interviews with air traffic controllers on duty on 9/11 was deliberately crushed, cut into very small pieces, and distributed in assorted places to insure its total destruction. How is this possible?

* The Pentagon conducted a training exercise called "MASCAL" simulating the crash of a Boeing 757 into the building on 24 October 2000, and yet Condoleezza Rice, among others, has repeatedly asserted that "no one ever imagined" a domestic airplane could be used as a weapon. How is this possible?

Their own physics research has established that only controlled demolitions are consistent with the near-gravity speed of fall and virtually symmetrical collapse of all three of the WTC buildings. While turning concrete into very fine dust, they fell straight-down into their own footprints.

These experts and scholars have found themselves obliged to conclude that the 9/11 atrocity represents an instance of the approach--which has been identified by Karl Rove, the President's closest adviser--of "creating our own reality." "

My thoughts on this, hell it’s possible you got the crooks in the White House ripping off the country. If that’s not enough they are going to rip you off as quickly as they can at the oil pumps. As for 991 and the World Trade Towers remember all that gold bullion in the vaults in the basement. Maybe you will try and convince me there not that greedy?

I believe they are building great palaces underground... Very expense ones... For one thing... and rigging the global markets for another... Buying up media, etc. Buying up armies, buying their way thru' ... the world...
A world they promised themselves to be their own.

I did this because it is such an important statement from someone I admire a great deal. Hope it is OK. I do not want to compete with you thread here, I just can't read this format without my yes going nutz.

Thanks,
Sandy

Last edited by mudwoman on 02-02-2006 07:08 PM, edited 1 time in total.

The whole situation kinda reminds me of the intelligence agent on MASH, who would shoot himself or knock himself out in order to carry out his "mission".
On local cable access channels I have seen two progams that address the inconsistencies and troubling aspects of both the report and the attacks.
If I catch them again anytime soon, I will note the titles and attempt to find the source.
The evidence put forth by the structural experts is certainly disturbing. But from what I saw and have read here and there, it seems as if the buildings were demolished intentionally.
Great link Alien_UK, thanks.

I have seen many buildings of all shapes and sizes demolished. They all act as these did, unless theres a snafu with prepping and execution. All on TV, wish I could see one live. It fascinates me.
Execption, of course, the 911 buildings which are a curiosity.

Last edited by daboodaddy on 02-03-2006 02:40 AM, edited 1 time in total.

Back on May 1, Anne had surgery to remove what was thought to be a benign tumor called a meningioma from the area in her brain where her bleed had taken place in 2004. We were dismayed to be given a far more serious diagnosis once the doctors could actually do studies of the tumor. She has a very, very dangerous cancer called a glioblastoma multiforme and worse, another very rare but dangerous tumor called a gliosarcoma. This second tumor could be a consequence of getting radiation from CT-scans in 2004, or it could be associated with an earlier incident that took place in 1992 or 1993 in our cabin. I think it might also have something to do with Fukushima. Maybe they both do, but so far no statistics have emerged that would suggest this. My problem with that is, would we be told if Fukushima radiation was causing cancer here?